Essential Lenses?

[DomnickLolas]

I’m curious as to what people would consider an “essential lens”. I currently have the 70-200 4.0 and the 18-55. I mainly shoot wildlife and landscapes but want to open up what i can shoot with different lenses. What are some suggestions?

[ebiggs1]

"I like to carry a camera body everywhere I go in a medium shoulder bag:

EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

EF 35mm f/2 IS USM - which was purchased prior to any of the above lenses

EF 1.4x III"

That is nearly what I carry with the following changes.

EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM  Tokina 16-28mm F/2.8 ATX Pro FX Zoom Lens.  It's a better lens

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

EF35mm f/2 IS USM - which was purchased prior to any of the above lenses    Not needed as it dups FL already included.

EF 1.4x II

Not in the bag as a general rule but always close at hand are the big Sigma twins;

Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens and,

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens

They do serve their intended purpose when that occasion arrives.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I like to carry a camera body everywhere I go in a medium shoulder bag:

EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

EF 35mm f/2 IS USM - which was purchased prior to any of the above lenses

EF 1.4x III"

That is nearly what I carry with the following changes.

EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM  Tokina 16-28mm F/2.8 ATX Pro FX Zoom Lens.  It's a better lens

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

EF35mm f/2 IS USM - which was purchased prior to any of the above lenses    Not needed as it dups FL already included.

EF 1.4x II

Not in the bag as a general rule but always close at hand are the big Sigma twins;

Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens and,

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens

They do serve their intended purpose when that occasion arrives.

---

I like the EF 35mm f/2 IS USM because of the IS.  I like to use it indoors in low light, slow shutter speed, shooting conditions.  It may duplicate the focal length, but it has a wider aperture and Image Stabilization.  The IS also helps when I hand the camera to someone.  

I do not bring the 100-400mm II or the Sigma 150-600mm C along unless I am specifically heading out to shoot sports or wildlife.  My favorite pair of bodies are a 6D2 with the 70-200mm II, and a 7D2 with the 100-400mm II.  

I do not bring the Sigma along as much because the 7D2 does not seem to like it very much. The 6D and 6D2 both get razor sharp photos, but the 7D2 does not.  All three bodies get razor sharp photos from the 70-200 and the 100-400 lenses, which leads me to think that it is NOT an AFMA isssue with the 7D2 and Sigma.  I suspect that it is the sensor size.  When I still had my T5, it did not capture tack sharp photos with the Sigma, either.

[ebiggs1]

"I like the EF 35mm f/2 IS USM because of the IS."

I still would not bag the 35mm because of one stop and IS on a 35mm is only slightly useful. But I understand every little bit helps if you need it.

This does bring up a point.  It does matter which body the essential bag is for. Rethinking my 1DX bag;

Tokina 16-28mm F/2.8 ATX Pro FX Zoom Lens.

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

No 35mm even though I have the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Lens. And no tel-con.  I thought back last year and decided I could count on the fingers of one hand how many times I used it.  Correction I only need one finger.  So, ditch the tel-con for 2020.

However, if the camera is my 1D Mk IV a better choice might be;

Tokina 16-28mm F/2.8 ATX Pro FX Zoom Lens.

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Lens

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Reason for the 35mm in this bag. I just looked over at my Mk IV and guess what lens is on it? The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Lens!  35mm is a great FL on the Mk IV.

Still close at hand are the big Sigma twins;

Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens and,

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens

And, a lens that I forgot to menton, doesn't get a lot of use, but a super fun lens any time you do use it is the Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM Lens. Gotta keep it close at hand but not in the general bag.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I like the EF 35mm f/2 IS USM because of the IS."

I still would not bag the 35mm because of one stop and IS on a 35mm is only slightly useful. But I understand every little bit helps if you need it.

However, if the camera is my 1D Mk IV a better choice might be;

Tokina 16-28mm F/2.8 ATX Pro FX Zoom Lens.

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Lens

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Reason for the 35mm in this bag. I just looked over at my Mk IV and guess what lens is on it? The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART Lens!  35mm is a great FL on the Mk IV.

---

The IS on the 35mm f/2 is worth at least another stop or two. 

It is funny that you mention using the 35mm on the 1D Mk IV, because that is where I mostly use mine.  A 35mm gives an excellent field of view.  But, like I said my primary purpose for it is low light.  I always carry a fast prime for low light.

[ebiggs1]

Totally agree but, "...  my primary purpose for it is low light."

The Canon is f2 and the Siggy is F1.4 I guess you need to decide whether IS is worth it or is that extra stop worth it.

The 35mm Art is sharp beyond belief but both lenses are plenty sharp. I sold my ef 35mm f2 and keep the Art because it is just a bit better IQ and is one stop faster less vignetting.  The Siggy Art is much heavier though.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Totally agree but, "...  my primary purpose for it is low light."

The Canon is f2 and the Siggy is F1.4 I guess you need to decide whether IS is worth it or is that extra stop worth it.

The 35mm Art is sharp beyond belief but both lenses are plenty sharp. I sold my ef 35mm f2 and keep the Art because it is just a bit better IQ and is one stop faster less vignetting.  The Siggy Art is much heavier though.

---

And, the 35mm Art is much bigger than the 35mm f/2.  Not sure how well it would fit in my current medium size bag.  Not sure how well my bad back would handle the extra weight, either.  I have downsized my everyday bag over the past two years.

BTW, I almost picked up the 35mm Art over the holidays.  It is still on sale, too, but at a much higher price now.  

[ebiggs1]

"I have downsized my everyday bag over the past two years."

I hear ya!  I have way less stuff today than a year ago and much less than two years ago.

[Unrelenting]

I have far more lenses than I need. The lens choice depends a lot on the type of photography you do. If I could have only three lenses, they would be

24-70mm II f/2.8 or 24-105 f4. The 24-70mm is a better optically but the 24-105 is more versatile.

70-200 II or III f/2.8. This is an amazing lens.

600mm III, but it is very expensive. It is a dream lens. A much less expensive good alternative is a used 500 mm f/4 (first generation) with a 1.4x extender. It's heavy but if you shoot on a tripod it doesn't matter.

If I could keep a fourth lens it would be the 11-24mm lens. I love that lens. A less expensive good alternative is the 16-24mm lens.

I have quite a few prime lenses but I don't use them too often (except for lenses of 400mm or longer), unless I want a very low f stop. The high end zoom lenses have become so good I don't see a need to use a prime lens for image quality.

If you like macro photography, a maco lens is a good investment.

[ebiggs1]

"The 6D and 6D2 both get razor sharp photos, but the 7D2 does not."

Hard to say what might be the issue.  My 7D, I had two, I no longer have either, got excellent pictures with any of the super zooms I have owned.  I do not have a 7D Mk II which I think is the last of the 7 series. Pity, too. I do not and never did have any 6 series. Can't comment.

My 7D's did very well with the Sigma APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Lens. Long story about it. I still have that lens but very rarely use it. It has become a super zoom loaner lens for me.  I let others wanting a tele lens to take it for a while to try out a super zoom.  Mostly Moms with a Rebel.

I had the C model before I got the S. I just never did like the plasticky C lens. Although, I don't think the S takes any sharper photos.  Maybe a tiny bit better but not much. BTW, my Tamron is plasticky, too.  I don't care for it either.

[RexGig]

The OP seems to be using an APS-C camera, so, dialing my time machine to my XTi/40D/7D days, I considered my EF-S 10-22mm and EF 100/2.8L Macro IS to be essential. The zoom covered ultra-wide to wide-normal. The Macro L took care of macro, which was largely why I started using DSLR cameras, in the first place, plus, portrait and general short telephoto duties. When I added a first-version EF 35/1.4L, life was really wonderful. Today, an EF 35/2 IS might be the better 35mm choice, for one who has an APS-C camera.

Seeing what the OP has, I would recommend adding an EF 35/2 IS. This is a superb lens for use on both APS-C and "full-frame" cameras. Image stabilization is truly useful. The ability to shoot at f/2 can be useful. One will never "outgrow" this lens, even if one adds an EF 35/1.4L II. (I say this, because I added my EF 35/1.4L II, in early 2018, and still like having the more-compact 35/2 IS, at times.)

"Wildlife" means different things, in different places, and to different shooters, so it is difficult for me to name an essential wildlife lens. The EF 100-400L II IS comes to mind, for daylight use, if the tree canopy is not too dense.